On the Logic of Battle resolution...

Adsum

Guest
Hey all.

A few random thoughts here. I've been using the simulator, and the results I am getting defy common sense.

Example:
Attacker: Hoplites 60 Slingers 30
Defender: Swords 60

Now according to the sim, the slingers will get totally wiped out in the attack, apparently contributing little to the success of the battle. Reducing casualties in hoplites, but overall losing a lot.

This is surprising to me, since normally ranged units in a real battle would be shielded by melee in the front -- by combining ranged and melee should achieve a crushing synergy against melee only troops. The ranged units shouldn't really be wiped out... ;-)

Any comments...?
 

M.Sockel

Guest
Well, my initial thoughts are: what is illogical is assuming a game should be a near-perfect emulation of 'real life' in order to be fun. In other words, it's just a game. As long as its internal logic is consistent, it makes no difference how that logic would behave in reality.

Grepolis happens to have a (sort of) rock-paper-scissors type of combat system, that is all. Swords are strong against range, and weak against sharp.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Evarua

Guest
Yeah, its unfortunately usually best if you just stick to 1 type of attacking type when you raid another player, well of course unless you just have to make sure you clear em.
 

Adsum

Guest
Understood -- the game doesn't believe in combining unit types in an attack. Perhaps its something that should be looked at for 3.0... I think it would add quite a bit of depth to the game if there were more elements to play with in the combat mechanics. ;-)

My concern with the current mechanics is that it lacks some internal logic. For instance:

60 hops attacking 60 swords. 27 hoplites lost or total resource sum 6075.

60 hops + 30 slingers attacking 60 swords: 30 slingers lost, 15 hops lost for total resource loss of 5850+3375 or 9225 resource units.

In other words, attacking with more troops in this example actually increases the losses, something that to me is frustrating. I accept that this is applied consistently in the game world and to that extent it has internal consistency -- it just doesn't make sense to *me* anyway. ;-)

-Adsum
 
Last edited by a moderator:

lord syron orm

Guest
There may not be a 3.0 for a few years, if there is one.
 

Adsum

Guest
This game has promise, I find it quite interesting. I hope it prospers and development continues.
 

lord syron orm

Guest
I hope theres a 3.0, but I want it to be more similar to 1.26 than 2.0
 

Edward2nd

Guest
at this rate the game will die out in 12 months :) just to put a dampener on things.
 

Adsum

Guest
What is driving the discontent?

at this rate the game will die out in 12 months :) just to put a dampener on things.

I'm curious.. what is wrong with 2.0? I have nothing to compare with, I started in Chi and Upsilon.
 

Evarua

Guest
Before you had to to be on around for an hour or two to farm an island. In 2.0 you have to sit at the screen apply toothpicks to your eyelids to keep them open and click 8 buttons every 5 minutes to get a good resource flow. On the upside with 2.0 if you only have 4minutes to be logged in you can very quickly farm a lot of resources on a longer timer....but the over all resources suck.

So basically the 2.x farming gives advantages compared to 1.x for people who play 27 hours a day and those who play 6minutes day, a very good business model fitting with the 80/20 rule, not so great for the actual game players though. It allows those super casuals that go from 175 points to 525 points in a time period of 2 months to farm much better in their 3minutes of daily log in time. And it allows the clockwork orange korean button mashers to continuously hit demand resources 280 times a day so they can use gold to make use of all the extra resources they are pulling in.

For the vast majority of players who more or less like to enjoy a fair game while logging in a couple hours a day, playing and chatting with friends, and getting into some wars, 2.x is a raw deal.

From a pure business perspective 2.x is great because it gives the minority that is willing to spend lots of cash on the game a mechanic giving them much more resources than they can spend naturally.
 

Adsum

Guest
I noticed the demand system is pretty annoying. I would expect a mechanic like that in advertiser supported games, would be a useful metric to convince advertisers. Seeing no ads, I'm rather surprised they went that route for resource generation...
 

Edward2nd

Guest
They are introducing a premium feature in the next update that will make it easier to farm, their words not mine. It is a money grab but yes it is suited to adds so I'd be expecting those soon too. not to be too negative hopefully grepo comes to its senses soon enough and fixes these issues.
 

Adsum

Guest
I can see it now -- added minister, Treasurer or some such... automatically collects tribute across the land. ;-)
 

qwerty16

Guest
When discussing 2.0, farming is the only thing players talk about. Are there any other major changes (apart from Hades)?
 
Top